Telangana High Court
Karnati Ravinder vs The State Of Telangana on 6 June, 2022
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No.20927 of 2022
O R D E R:
This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent
No.3 in issuing notice under Section 185 of TSM Act, 2019
dated 20-04-2022 in removing 10% deviation of the petitioner's shops
and residential house bearing No.6-6-464, Ravinder Nagar, Hyderabad
Road, Nalgonda Town and District, for the purpose of road widening
without initiating any acquisition proceedings and without paying
compensation, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Jalla Nagaraj,
learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban
Development for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for
Revenue for respondent No.2 and learned Standing Counsel
Mr. N. Praveen Kumar, for respondent No.3.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially,
respondent No.3 has issued a notice to the petitioner on 04-04-2022
stating that Nalgonda Municipality is proposing to implement and
develop Master Plan roads from Marriguda to Clock Tower Junction,
which comes under 100' feet in order to overcome the increasing traffic
problems and directed the petitioner to submit relevant documents of
2 LK, J
W.P.No.20927 of 2022
his property along with building permission obtained from the
competent authority on or before 07-04-2022 at 3.00 pm as per Section
254 of TSM Act, 2019. He further submits that the petitioner has
submitted his explanation on 06-04-2022 by submitting the relevant
documents and requested the office to provide the Master Plan
sanctioned by the State Government along with any Gazette
Notification for the said road widening proposal and also stated that as
he has no other source of income except the rent derived from the
property, he cannot be deprived of his property rights without fair and
decent compensation under Act, 2013. He further submits that the
respondents have passed an order under Section 185 of TSM Act,
2019 dated 20-04-2022 stating that the petitioner has encroached 100'
wide road to a width of 10 feet and constructed commercial shops and
running Ice Cream Shop duly violating the zoning regulations of
Nalgonda Municipality issued vide G.O.Ms.No.594 MA,
dated 08-06-1987 and deviated the sanctioned plan duly constructed
the building without maintaining the setbacks as per the sanctioned
plan and instructed the petitioner to remove the encroached portion
within 24 hours from the date of the order. Learned counsel submits
that initially, a show cause notice was issued for the purpose of
widening the road and the petitioner has submitted his explanation
along with the relevant documents, but surprisingly, the impugned
order came to be passed stating that the petitioner has encroached the
3 LK, J
W.P.No.20927 of 2022
road and made constructions contrary to the sanctioned plan. He
submits that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to submit his
explanation and this order is not preceded by any show cause notice
and as such the impugned notice under Section 185 of TSM Act, 2019
is unsustainable.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that
after looking at the documents, they found that the petitioner has made
unauthorised constructions and also encroached the road, as such they
have issued the impugned notice.
5. The whole purpose of issuing the impugned notice in this case is
for widening the road and also for submission of the relevant
documents under Section 254 of TSM Act, 2019. Now, when the
petitioner has submitted the relevant documents, the respondents have
come to a conclusion that the petitioner has encroached the road and
constructed contrary to the sanctioned plan, but without even affording
an opportunity to give an explanation, the respondents directed the
petitioner to remove the encroached portion within 24 hours from the
date of the notice contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and others v. Sunbeam High
Tech Developers Private Limited1. On the face of it, the impugned notice
is unsustainable and hence, the same is set aside. Treating the
(2019) 20 SCC 781
4 LK, J
W.P.No.20927 of 2022
impugned notice dated 20-04-2022 as a show cause notice, the
petitioner shall submit his explanation within a period of three weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such
explanation, the respondents shall pass orders within three weeks
thereafter specifically taking into consideration the judgment of the
Apex Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai's case (supra).
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to
costs.
7. Miscellaneous Applications, if any pending in this writ petition,
shall stand closed.
_______________________
LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J
6th June, 2022
sj
